The violation of ethics in scientific studies, that results in a publication, affects academic and public confidence in researchers, research groups, scientific communities, institutions, sponsors, and journals in general. Equally, it damages reputation, leads to loss of time, effort, and economic resources, and puts the participants of a study and the community it could impact at risk. Therefore, principles, definitions, guidelines, and procedures are required to ensure quality, transparency, and rigor.

To this end, the Journal follows the flowcharts on handling ethical issues in publishing suggested by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE); the principles of transparency and best practices in scholarly publishing of COPE and other bodies; the Council of Science Editors (CSE) publication ethics condensed in the White Paper on Publication Ethics; the Singapore Declaration on Research Integrity and the Montreal Declaration on Research Integrity in Research Collaborations Crossing Borders; the Hong Kong Principles; the Scientific, Technical and Administrative Standards for Health Research in Colombia (Resolution number 8430 of 1993); the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights; the Helsinki Declaration on Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects; ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines for animal research of the National Center for Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research; to the Deontology and bioethics of the psychologist in Colombia; to the Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct of the American Psychological Association (APA); to the laws on copyright in Colombia: Law 599 of 2000 and Law 1915 of 2018; and to the Ethical policies for scientific dissemination and publication at the Universidad de San Buenaventura Colombia.

These guidelines should be taken as a guide for the responsible production of research and are in no way a regulation. Therefore, researchers and sponsors should follow the official policies of the appropriate national agencies and organizations.

In line with the above, the journal will require that the writings and authors comply with the principles and responsibilities of scientific research and publication integrity to avoid fraud and violation of ethics and copyright.

Research integrity

It is the behavior or procedure that is executed correctly in the practice of science, and in which honesty, transparency, justice, and responsibility stand out. It presupposes respect for ethical and legal principles in the preparation, conduction, and publication of research. The Singapore statement on research integrity is shown below.

Singapore statement on research integrity


The value and benefits of research are vitally dependent on the integrity of research. While there can be and are national and disciplinary differences in the way research is organized and conducted, there are also principles and professional responsibilities that are fundamental to the integrity of research wherever it is undertaken.


  • Honesty in all aspects of research.
  • Accountability in the conduct of research.
  • Professional courtesy and fairness in working with others.
  • Good stewardship of research on behalf of others.


  • Integrity: Researchers should take responsibility for the trustworthiness of their research.
  • Adherence to Regulations: Researchers should be aware of and adhere to regulations and policies related to research.
  • Research Methods: Researchers should employ appropriate research methods, base conclusions on critical analysis of the evidence and report findings and interpretations fully and objectively.
  • Research Methods: Researchers should employ appropriate research methods, base conclusions on critical analysis of the evidence and report findings and interpretations fully and objectively.
  • Research Findings: Researchers should share data and findings openly and promptly, as soon as they have had an opportunity to establish priority and ownership claims.
  • Authorship: Researchers should take responsibility for their contributions to all publications, funding applications, reports and other representations of their research. Lists of authors should include all those and only those who meet applicable authorship criteria.
  • Publication Acknowledgement: Researchers should acknowledge in publications the names and roles of those who made significant contributions to the research, including writers, funders, sponsors, and others, but do not meet authorship criteria.
  • Peer Review: Researchers should provide fair, prompt and rigorous evaluations and respect confidentiality when reviewing others' work.
  • Conflicts of interest: researchers must disclose any conflict of interest, financial or otherwise, that would compromise the reliability of their work, in research proposals, publications and public communications, as well as in any evaluation activity.
  • Public Communication: Researchers should limit professional comments to their recognized expertise when engaged in public discussions about the application and importance of research findings and clearly distinguish professional comments from opinions based on personal views.
  • Reporting Irresponsible Research Practices: Researchers should report to the appropriate authorities any suspected research misconduct, including fabrication, falsification or plagiarism, and other irresponsible research practices that undermine the trustworthiness of research, such as carelessness, improperly listing authors, failing to report conflicting data, or the use of misleading analytical methods.
  • Responding to Irresponsible Research Practices: Research institutions, as well as journals, professional organizations and agencies that have commitments to research, should have procedures for responding to allegations of misconduct and other irresponsible research practices and for protecting those who report such behavior in good faith. When misconduct or other irresponsible research practice is confirmed, appropriate actions should be taken promptly, including correcting the research record.
  • Research Environments: Research institutions should create and sustain environments that encourage integrity through education, clear policies, and reasonable standards for advancement, while fostering work environments that support research integrity.
  • Societal Considerations: Researchers and research institutions should recognize that they have an ethical obligation to weigh societal benefits against risks inherent in their work.

Fraud and violation of ethics

Fraud is an action that goes against truth and righteousness. Therefore, scientific fraud is the materialization of one or more behaviors identified as bad practices that harm individuals, communities and institutions. The most relevant of these are presented below.

Fabrication of data

Fabrication and use of fictitious data in research and publication, presenting it as real or factual data from the research exercise.


Manipulation of materials, technical equipment or processes, through either change or omission of the data or results of an investigation. Falsification is intended to obtain desired results that prove hypotheses or conform to the objectives of the study.


Assertion of ownership of texts, sections of text, methods or any other information (tables, figures, graphs, photos, etc.), as well as published procedures or techniques, without acknowledging, citing or referring to the original author.


Reuse of content published by the same author in a new publication, without giving the respective credit (self-citation) and passing it off as original, novel or unpublished.

Improper authorship

Inclusion of natural or legal persons as authors in the research or in the writing of the article without having had a real, clear and direct participation in these processes. Other forms of inappropriate authorship are: excluding co-authors who actively participated, claiming undeserved authorship in their own name, including external persons as authors without their due consent, affiliating an article to more than one institution when the research was carried out in a single entity, and sending the article to a journal without the consent of all the authors.

Text recycling

hree cases of this action can be identified: duplicate, fragmented and inflated publication. Duplicate publication is that in which the author republishes his article, partially or fully, in one or more other publishers or journals. Fragmented publication, also known as salami publication, seeks to divide a study into several parts in order to increase the number of articles to be published in different journals or publishers. Finally, inflated publication refers to articles in which parts of the previously published results are added without giving credit or informing the editor.

Premature publication

To make the results of a research project known in advance without carrying out the necessary scientific checks or tests.

Citation stacking

Agreement between journal editors to exchange citations, thus forcing authors to accept references in their articles in order to increase their citation indicators and move up in the quartiles.

Publishing biases

In the authors: Giving greater relevance to a study or studies, without taking into account other research in the same line, just because they contradict their results. In the editors: Rejecting articles that have not confirmed the hypotheses, either because of the origin of the authors or because of the lack of research career of many of them.

Other violations of ethics

In authors

Authors  may incur a violation of ethics for: inclusion of references that have not been cited (in order to add citations or increase the impact of authors, institutions, journals, etc.), the inclusion of citations that are not thematically coherent with the research; excessive use of self-citations, omission of important research information, concealment of data, endangerment of people, communities, animals or the environment, refusal to provide data for validation of the results, thereby not supporting the validation of the research, concealment of conflicts of interest, attestation to institutions that did not finance or support the research, reveal of personal data of research participants without authorization.

In editors

Editors  may incur in a violation of ethics for: bias in the selection of articles, failure to peer review manuscripts, preferential treatment by authors, friends or colleagues (conflict of interest), violation of confidentiality, and intentional delays in the editing process.

In reviewers

Reviewers  may incur in a violation of ethics for:  plagiarism of the ideas, texts or data they review, acceptance of invitations when there are conflicts of interest and they do not declare them, violation of confidentiality and anonymity, and intentional delays in the review process.

In sponsors

Sponsors  may incur in a violation of ethics for: modification, suppression or omission of results that they consider inconvenient, failure to clearly and appropriately disclose their participation in the study, pressure to include other persons as authors, refusal to allow the authors access to the data, and intentional delay in publication.

Roles and duties in scientific research and publishing

The parties involved directly or indirectly in the research and publication process are diverse and, therefore, share responsibilities. Among them are the sponsoring institution, the author(s), the editor(s), and the peer reviewers.

Sponsoring entity

As promoter, manager or funder of research projects for the advancement of science, the sponsoring entity has the responsibility to:

  • Implement ethical policies on research.
  • Provide spaces for the socialization of ethical policies and the promotion of conduct in accordance with the standards.
  • Assure that research data will not be modified, suppressed or omitted.
  • Guarantee that researchers (authors) will give credit to participating institutions and include appropriate affiliations in the articles.
  • Acknowledge in a clear manner the authorship on research and publications, and ensure that these are not modified or altered in the process.
  • Be diligent in the response to and review of complaints against the investigation, with due protection for the reporting and accused parties through the activation of protocols according to policy and ensuring fair and objective procedures for their resolution.


As a creator of scientific content, every author must revolutionize the current way of thinking about science, as well as innovate and propose new ways to meet needs, solve problems and find alternatives to social demands. Therefore, the author has the responsibility to:

  • Know and apply institutional or sponsor policies for research production.
  • Understand the intent of institutional or sponsor rules and work ethically in each of the actions undertaken.
  • Formulate relevant and pertinent projects, with robust and up-to-date designs and analyses suitable for the scope of the study.
  • Submit research projects to the ethics committee or the body acting in its stead, in order to safeguard any matter that may jeopardize the research and those who participate in it.
  • Obtain the informed consent approved by the ethics committee, socialize it with the participants and obtain their signatures as a sign of acceptance.
  • Procure permits for the partial or total reproduction of previously published material that is not in the public domain or licensed for use.
  • Have the authorized publication consent of the study participants, when the publication of personal data (e.g., photographs) is necessary.
  • Do no harm or pose no risk to human beings, communities, animal species or the environment, which are part of the research.
  • Report suspected research misconduct to the institutional manager.
  • Comply with legal, ethical, financial and institutional requirements for the collection, storage, disclosure and usage of data, especially personal data.
  • Maintain confidentiality to protect intellectual property rights.
  • Ensure the factuality, order, verification and approval of co-authorships, in accordance with the submission and the policy of the journal.
  • Secure the unedited nature of the manuscript (whether printed or digital), that is to say, it is not available on the Internet, in repositories, databases, web pages, blogs, etc., and it is not being considered by another journal or publisher.
  • Declare in a transparent manner the source(s) of financing, and leave the institutional affiliations that supported the research in the articles.
  • Provide the editor with the necessary and sufficient information for an adequate evaluation of the manuscript and clarification of doubts in the research or editing process.
  • State conflicts of interest.


The editor, the highest representative of a journal, has the responsibility to:

  • Coordinate the ethical policy of the journal, and compliance with safe practices in authors, peer reviewers and the editorial team, thus guaranteeing the transparency of the process.
  • Check that the article submitted to the journal is original and has not been submitted to another journal or published in any digital or printed media.
  • Safeguard the scientific quality of the contents, guaranteeing the evaluation of suitable external peers.
  • Make objective and unbiased decisions in the publication of articles based on the opinions of peers and the editorial committee.
  • Deal with all authors and the editorial team in a cordial, respectful and equitable manner, without discrimination or favoritism.
  • Reassure compliance with authorship criteria, such as the respective approvals of the manuscript version, order of appearance, submission and journal policy.
  • Study reports of possible breaches of ethics and handle them in accordance with the guidelines given by the COPE and the pertinent institutional bodies, thus protecting the integrity of the works by means of corrections or retractions when necessary.
  • Be clear with authors, peer reviewers and the editorial team, so that they are aware of what is expected of them.
  • Take precaution against encouraging authors to include in their articles references to works published in the same journal, or to make agreements with other editors to establish citation exchanges between the journals they edit.
  • Request authors to state their conflicts of interest.
  • Encourage authors to adhere to the highest standards of research and publication ethics.

Peer reviewers

Reviewers (evaluators or arbiters) are essential for the quality and continuity of scientific publications, which is why they must guarantee that the contents of a publication are rigorous. Therefore, they have the responsibility to:

  • Analyze the research in depth, with seriousness and honesty.
  • State whether they have any conflict of interest and if so, decline the invitation.
  • Maintain data confidentiality and anonymity.
  • Decline the invitation to evaluate if the subject matter of the article does not fit their specialty.
  • Be objective, clear, technical and argumentative, and justify their rebuttals.
  • Show respect for their comments and refrain from making demands on the authors that go beyond the objective of the research.
  • Inform the editor if they suspect behavior that casts doubt on the research or if they find information that validates such suspicions (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data manipulation, research bias, etc.).

Complaints and appeals

The editor is responsible for receiving and processing all complaints and appeals. Depending on their nature and complexity, the editor should take into account COPE protocols, and rely on his or her editorial committee and other institutional bodies (ethics committee, intellectual property committee, legal counsel, etc.). All complaints and appeals should be communicated to the editor via e-mail; if the editor has a conflict of interest or the complaints and appeals are against him/her, they should be written to the e-mail address of the editorial director, who will receive and deal with all complaints and appeals following the protocols indicated above.

Course of action and penalty in the case of fraud or violation of ethics

Fraud or violation of research or publication ethics can be identified by the editor or editorial team in light of the analysis of a similarity report; peer reviewers, who inform the editor about errors, anomalies or fraud; and the scientific community, the audience of the journal or other persons who denounce the misconduct.

The editor, as the highest representative of the journal, must take the necessary steps within his or her reach to safeguard the scientific integrity of the publication and in no case will allow any fraudulent action that violates ethics to go unnoticed.

In the face of potential malpractices detected, the editor should rely on his or her editorial committee and follow the COPE guidelines, namely: maintain confidentiality, do not make accusations, take a neutral position in accordance with the facts, keep and protect complete and accurate records of the case, give the accused the opportunity to respond to the complaint, inform all those involved in the process (authors, funders, other editors, etc.), and delegate investigations to the relevant institutional bodies (ethics committee, intellectual property committee, legal counsel, or the institution responsible for the investigation, etc.) and delegate investigations to the relevant institutional bodies (ethics committee, intellectual property committee, legal counsel, or institution responsible for the investigation).

There will be cases that can be identified in time, i.e., before the publication of the article, and others identified after its publication. In all cases, the recommendation is to follow the protocols or guidelines suggested by the COPE and receive guidance from the relevant institutional bodies. If the case is not severe, is in the process of publication and the authors present their excuses and justifications, it will be the decision of the editor to continue with the publication of the article once the corrections are made. If the fault is severe, the editor will reject the article and inform the decision to all those involved in the process. If the identification and confirmation of an error, fraud, or breach of ethics are subsequent to publication, the editor may proceed with the following actions (after review of COPE protocols or guidelines, advice from the relevant institutional bodies, and support from the editorial committee): if the errors presented in the article are minor or unintentional, an erratum may be published in the next issue. If the error is deemed to be serious, the article will be retracted, those involved in the process will be informed of the decision and the authors will be notified of the measures taken by the journal.

A retraction is a statement that an article has violated good practice in research, writing, or publication. A retracted article is not deleted or removed from the journal, but the word RETRACTED is superimposed on each page of the article as a notice to those who may have previously used it. The retraction is also updated in Crossmark to inform readers that there has been a change in the article. For the Revista Guillermo de Ockham, amendments to an article (corrections, retractions) strive for the integrity of the publication, and in no case should they be interpreted as punitive actions or be used by third parties to punish the authors involved. It will be the role of the affiliate institutions of the authors to investigate potential misconduct and take action in accordance with their policies.

Ethical supervision

The editorial team of the Revista Guillermo de Ockham takes research and publication ethics very seriously. Annually, the editor and his editorial committee will review and update the journal's ethical policies. For this purpose, they will review the new COPE updates and invite the Bioethics Committee of the Universidad de San Buenaventura to participate in the review, update, and provide guidance to all actors involved in the research and publication process.

We invite the entire community of authors, peer reviewers, readers, researchers, and the general audience of the journal to report any dishonest act that jeopardizes the integrity of the research and publication. Both the editor and its editorial committee are attentive to receiving and managing in a timely manner any complaint and activate in a timely manner the protocols and escalate the cases to the relevant authorities.